I am an anarchist - ask me anything.

[Orange_Crush]

Sorry for my vagueness, and perhaps, for my mis-label.

At the granular level, an economy based on a fiat currency. At a greater level, an economy such as our markets that are traded more on perceived value to the extent that markets run almost solely on confidence. See the 2008 near-collapse. The tax-payer injections were needed because confidence in the market was near-collapse. Once confidence goes, the economy seizes up and collapses.

But in context, I was referring to fiat currency-based economies, as opposed to currencies based on a standard value--i.e. the gold standard.

 

[McDad]

Sorry for my vagueness, and perhaps, for my mis-label.

At the granular level, an economy based on a fiat currency. At a greater level, an economy such as our markets that are traded more on perceived value to the extent that markets run almost solely on confidence. See the 2008 near-collapse. The tax-payer injections were needed because confidence in the market was near-collapse. Once confidence goes, the economy seizes up and collapses.

But in context, I was referring to fiat currency-based economies, as opposed to currencies based on a standard value--i.e. the gold standard.

Isn't it impossible to remove "confidence" out of currency even if the currency is based on standard value?

 

[Orange_Crush]

Isn't it impossible to remove "confidence" out of currency even if the currency is based on standard value?

Perhaps, to a point. I guess there could always be a loss of confidence if participants lost faith in the issuer's trustworthiness to redeem. But it's not impossible to minimize confidence problems by implementing a standard backing.

 

[McDad]

Perhaps, to a point. I guess there could always be a loss of confidence if participants lost faith in the issuer's trustworthiness to redeem. But it's not impossible to minimize confidence problems by implementing a standard backing.

I ask because the run on the banks occured when the currency was backed by the gold standard. Confidence was the variable that mutated. Not the value or supply of gold.

 

[n_huffhines]

Sorry for my vagueness, and perhaps, for my mis-label.

At the granular level, an economy based on a fiat currency. At a greater level, an economy such as our markets that are traded more on perceived value to the extent that markets run almost solely on confidence. See the 2008 near-collapse. The tax-payer injections were needed because confidence in the market was near-collapse. Once confidence goes, the economy seizes up and collapses.

But in context, I was referring to fiat currency-based economies, as opposed to currencies based on a standard value--i.e. the gold standard.

Yeah, and if gold-backed currency is the best currency, that will win out in a free market for currency.

 

[iVol4Life]

He's trying to talk his Marxist professor into creating a VN account, iyam.

I've spent some time reading and formulating more clear responses to some of the questions here, as I've been a bit unclear in my posts. I'm not done yet, and I'm taking a break from it. Honestly, I'm just a bit burnt out. I'll get back to it when I feel like it.

 

[red butler]

1) inflation isn't really currency volatility

2) how in the world is bitcoin not subject to inflation?

Inflation is typically the result of an expansion of the money supply. There are a limited number of bitcoins available to be mined, therefore it will remain stable. Of course the velocity could increase dramatically, resulting in inflation, but the increased velocity would probably be offset by economic growth; resulting in low inflation.

Now if banks were allowed to extend bitcoin credit in a fractional reserve system ... we'd eventually be in pretty much the same boat we're in now.

 

[red butler]

I ask because the run on the banks occured when the currency was backed by the gold standard. Confidence was the variable that mutated. Not the value or supply of gold.

IMO bank runs have nothing to do with the type of currency used. People lost confidence in the banks ability to give them their deposits. If we didn't have FDIC insurance I would have pulled all my money out of the bank a long time ago.

 

[apevol]

I know I keep all my cash in a dime roll, hidden in Huff's panties.

 

[volfanhill]

Inflation is typically the result of an expansion of the money supply. There are a limited number of bitcoins available to be mined, therefore it will remain stable. Of course the velocity could increase dramatically, resulting in inflation, but the increased velocity would probably be offset by economic growth; resulting in low inflation.

Now if banks were allowed to extend bitcoin credit in a fractional reserve system ... we'd eventually be in pretty much the same boat we're in now.

That's a gross over simplification of how inflation works

 

[n_huffhines]

That's a gross over simplification of how inflation works

Inflation often gets confused with increases in the money supply (and I think I may have misstated something earlier, along those lines). They aren't the same thing, but increases in the money supply result in inflation.

So, it should be said that Bitcoin pre-empts the most common cause of inflation. It's not that it completely resists inflation.

 

[red butler]

That's a gross over simplification of how inflation works

Maybe so, but the same argument, plus the data to back it up, won Milton Friedman the Nobel prize for economics.

 

[Carl Pickens]

I know I keep all my cash in a dime roll, hidden in Huff's panties.

What happens when you pull out your money?

 

[apevol]

What happens when you pull out your money?

Hilarity.

Fwiw, CP, this is a reference to the funniest thing that ever happened in the NBA forum. I can't remember which thread, though.

 

[PKT_VOL]

A confidence-based economy is very dangerous. As soon as people start losing confidence, it all comes down. A real-value economy is much less fragile.

What is a confidence based economy?

I'm not sure what Crush means by "real-value economy" either.

At the granular level, an economy based on a fiat currency. At a greater level, an economy such as our markets that are traded more on perceived value to the extent that markets run almost solely on confidence. See the 2008 near-collapse. The tax-payer injections were needed because confidence in the market was near-collapse. Once confidence goes, the economy seizes up and collapses.

But in context, I was referring to fiat currency-based economies, as opposed to currencies based on a standard value--i.e. the gold standard.

Economies by their very nature, an aggregate of self-interested interactions between social creatures, are confidence based. It doesn't matter whether it is fiat based, a bunch of ones and zeros, gold, or quid pro quo.

Here is the thread from a couple years ago about gold being confidence based: http://www.volnation.com/forum/politics/165890-gold.html

 

[Orange_Crush]

Economies by their very nature, an aggregate of self-interested interactions between social creatures, are confidence based. It doesn't matter whether it is fiat based, a bunch of ones and zeros, gold, or quid pro quo.

Here is the thread from a couple years ago about gold being confidence based: http://www.volnation.com/forum/politics/165890-gold.html

I don't disagree, PKT. Perhaps I communicated my point poorly. I was speaking on a continuum of confidence-based economies.

 

[82_VOL_83]

I guess the OP troll decided that the conservative circle jerk that is VN was a little much for his utopiotic ass.

 

[n_huffhines]

I guess the OP troll decided that the conservative circle jerk that is VN was a little much for his utopiotic ass.

Nothing you said dissuaded him, I'm certain.

 

[Grand Vol]

Nothing you said dissuaded him, I'm certain.

You and DTH seem to be the resident anarchist specialists. Is what he's talking about actually a branch of anarchism? The socialist part of it?

 

[82_VOL_83]

Nothing you said dissuaded him, I'm certain.

Yeah, because when you have no substance to back your BS you can just leave.

 

[volinbham]

Inflation is typically the result of an expansion of the money supply. There are a limited number of bitcoins available to be mined, therefore it will remain stable. Of course the velocity could increase dramatically, resulting in inflation, but the increased velocity would probably be offset by economic growth; resulting in low inflation.

Now if banks were allowed to extend bitcoin credit in a fractional reserve system ... we'd eventually be in pretty much the same boat we're in now.

Fundamentally, inflation is change (reduction) buying power for a given unit of any currency.

Inflation can be impacted by changes in the money supply but such changes are not the only factor impacting inflation.

In other words, the loss in buying power of a 1982 dollar is not simply due to expansion of the money supply.

 

[n_huffhines]

You and DTH seem to be the resident anarchist specialists. Is what he's talking about actually a branch of anarchism? The socialist part of it?

I know almost nothing about the theory of socialist anarchy. Under an cap there would be little socialist communities, but that's not what he's talking about

 

[n_huffhines]

Yeah, because when you have no substance to back your BS you can just leave.

You can't dismiss my case just because an cap has never been tried.

 

[82_VOL_83]

You can't dismiss my case just because an cap has never been tried.

Nancy, this isn't about you at all. This is about the OP. I know you want to jump in here and use this as a stage to espouse knowledge about what you consider a political ideology, which in and of itself is the absence of political ideology, but this primarily started out as a college student presenting a form of utopia that he read about in school for a poli-sci class. His drivel was backed up by fluff, backed up by nothing. After this was pointed out repeatedly, he made the typical liberal plea for civil discourse and then decided he couldn't cut it and left.

That is what this is about.

And yes, I dismiss your case because your case depends on everyone fitting a particular mold. You may say no, but I say yes. In your vision of anarchy, the market will make everyone play fair. That is quite honestly BS. No one will play fair. With anarchy there is no government, with no government there are no laws other than those imposed by pockets of people. If my pocket of people is bigger and more well armed than yours, I win. Your anarchy is the 6 month step right before my anarchy.......which is to say, all hell breaking loose. It will be the wild wild west with no territorial law. Each town or group of people will have their own laws based on what they perceive as fair. Give me one example of anarchy EVER working anywhere for an extended period of time.

 

[n_huffhines]

Nancy, this isn't about you at all. This is about the OP. I know you want to jump in here and use this as a stage to espouse knowledge about what you consider a political ideology

Dude, you made it about me. I thought I was doing a pretty good job of leaving an cap out of it, and letting him defend his position.

Yeah, because when you have no substance to back your BS you can just leave.